Awesome! I love how you approached the whole issue from a biblical standpoint.

It is not a simple issue but very important as we seek to connect and communicate.

Wrote on this for our church a small bit in August: http://www.powerofchange.org/blog/2009/8/1/watch-your-mouth.html

This actually has been something that God has really worked on me about in the last year and especially as of lately between seeing a couple books/sermons (Piper/Chan) about communicating and re-living things that I have said while speaking to students and adults. The verses you provided are the some of the same that I had set on my dash while driving and calling people ignorant or idiot. These same verses God has brought back to mind about my communicating or even my tweets that I post on twitter. Honestly, I had a disconnect between my car and the stage. Carelessness of words has the potential to destroy our journey that we take followers and outsiders to the principles that we teach from the Word. I found myself blogging about the same thing yesterday after couple conversations that I had with people in my local Starbucks. Did I maintain integrity of the Jesus to those people with what I said or didn't say? Rolling across this post is just another affirmation from God that I need to be more slow and wise with my words. Thanks!

Interesting -- I've just been thinking about this topic over the past few days. Not sure why. Maybe I need to pay more attention to the words I use and even more attention to what I mean by the words I use. Thanks.

The verse that often stops me cold dead in my tracks is Matthew 12:36-37.

I am troubled that this is actually being debated at all in some circles. Jesus engaged culture by being Himself and speaking Spirit-saturated words that penetrated past the sham of legalism and selfishness.

If I am going to be held accountable for every idle word I speak (and I know I already have volumes of those), then why add more nonsense to the mix. The character of Christ must manifest in word and deed. Any attempt on my part to divorce one fro the other will only hinder my ability to reach others for Jesus.

There isn't anything that I fundamentally disagree with in the post. However, what this usually turns into is one group of people telling another group of people what is appropriate. As long as the individual gets to make their own decisions about appropriateness and there is not some list of words somewhere or when there is a violation the person offended actually goes to the person that offended them and handles it privately and appropriately then I am all for it. But when John McArthur castigates Mark Driscoll years after Mark Driscoll has already repented and changed his language, then it is about cultural differences or making points with your own people, not about preserving the gospel.

I don't think beating a dead horse is the same as what Ed is talking about. Macarthur should know better than that and frankly, I didn't think much of his ranting other than kicking up dust.

But list or no list, everyone has to judge what they say and how they say it by the Spirit of Jesus, His character, and His Word. If our motives and intentions are right, then "lists" don't really come into play except for those who have issues with certain words.

Though I'm older than dirt; I'm still primarily a youth guy; and I, too, have blown it in this regard...unintentionally, but still. There are some who seem to intentionally try to shock/provoke etc merely with words; but I try to regularly repeat the prayer, "Lord, set a watch over my lips..."

I especially like your words..."If you are a teacher, then you are not a child, so don't speak like one." God uses the pastors and teachers to help build His body, if our language is childish or vulgar or immature, how do we help build spiritual maturity into the body?
I am all for relevance and reaching the culture, but I cannot buy into the notion that we need to speak like the world to reach the world. I used to be a bartender, but those folks don't need another person who emulates their world of sin and death. We need to speak words of life & hope & peace. We are smart enough to speak intelligently and righteously while we relate to the lost.

This is a great post. I remember using the phrase "pissed off" in seminary during a sermon in my preaching lab. It was an advanced preach class on preaching to the unchurched. Our prof was an old hippie who had been beaten in Mississippi in the 60's and was part of the original Peace Corp. In many ways I was trying to impress him with how edgy I was. After the message he said to the whole class he remembers nothing that I said because of the phrase I used. He then proceeded to say, what I will never forget: "If you can't say a good word about Jesus, sit down. And if you saying anything that gets in the way, don't say it." Needless to say I did not grade well in that class!

The question which I believe we need to ask ourselves sounds something like - "When I've said this, am I calling attention to me or does it call attention to the Word?"

Clear Gospel can be preached without shock. And while "I" may not intend to shock or offend, ultimately it's up to my hearers to decide. If I'm using language which is causing them to focus on me rather than keep their focus on Jesus, I better comb through my notes to clear out any potential pebbles which would cause them to stumble. It's for their sake, not mine.

The question which I believe we need to ask ourselves sounds something like - "When I've said this, am I calling attention to me or does it call attention to the Word?"

Clear Gospel can be preached without shock. And while "I" may not intend to shock or offend, ultimately it's up to my hearers to decide. If I'm using language which is causing them to focus on me rather than keep their focus on Jesus, I better comb through my notes to clear out any potential pebbles which would cause them to stumble. It's for their sake, not mine.

Good read, thanks for the sharing.

Ed,
This is a very appropriate subject for today. I am not sure what your target is but there are many paths this discussion should take.

The first thing that came to my mind was the use of vulgar language or profanity in the pulpit by pastors such as the one in the Northwest. I understand he has repented of this but others may still think that is the cool thing to do. It seems like the attempt was to be relevant or to appeal to others that use that type of language. I think there is a danger of offending more people than you attract. Also if this is not something you approve for continued use in their Christian life why use it to attract them? Does the use of this language honor God?

Ed, you have some connection to LIfeway I believe. In the January lessons in one of the books on Ruth, Ralph West used language that was offensive to some. While this may be okay for him to use in his church, I wonder if the editors at Lifeway were wise to allow this to be presented across the SBC. It seems his description of Naomi and Ruth and her relation to Boaz was not only factually suspect but not appropriate for a broad audience. Your thoughts?

Another problem for us in the SBC has been the longtime use of the terms moderate/liberal in a slanderous and dishonest manner. This would include at many pastor's conferences. We seem to have forgotten Eph. 4:29 and Col. 3:8 that you quote. I am always amazed that those who claim to be inerrantist could have so little regard for obeying the Bible they claim is true.

Geoff,

Reid, interesting writing. Thanks for sharing it.

Geoff, I used the word "crap" in my first sermon in college (at a local / older rural church). Thought it would make a point-- believing this is "crap." Nobody heard anything else that day!

Nate, "Clear gospel can be preached without shock."

Ed

It is not just the language in the pulpit. Whatever is in a man comes out. We ought to be people that don't use filthy language inside or outside the pulpit.

Josh Hunt
www.joshhunt.com

It is not just the language in the pulpit. Whatever is in a man comes out. We ought to be people that don't use filthy language inside or outside the pulpit.

Josh Hunt
www.joshhunt.com

I would only add that "filthy" requires context, culture and intent of the speaker - not simply "these are the 15 filthy words on a list in heaven"

Most don't even think about this and just judge people and their speech from their prior cultural experiences or what they were taught.

Ed, not sure of your meaning by "interesting" ;)

I have been a missionary overseas for more than 25 years. When I come back and hear pastors using bad language in the pulpit I about fainted. Be real are the words damn, hell and pissed off biblical examples of what Jesus would do?

It's been my observation for a long time that when a preacher feels a need to "shock talk" he is thinking more about himself, than his message, or the people receiving it.

And, when a preacher does unleash an inappropriate word in most instances the point he was trying to make is long forgotten, but the memory of the language used never is, so, what' the point of using any kind of foul language in a sermon?

I disagree that offensive talk is to never be used. Jesus used offensive talk several times intentionally. Brood of Vipers? Eat my flesh, drink my blood? It's all about context.

Michael beat me to it.

Jesus and all the prophets before him said things that were shocking and caused people to stop listening. When Amos called the women of Bashan cows, when Jesus calls the religious leaders children of the devil, that is shocking and offensive to them.

So, should I then drop the f-bomb in my sermons? Probably not. If I'm shocking people just to get a reaction, that's not helpful or godly. But if I am speaking a prophetic word (I am compelled to speak the word of God), then I'm more concerned with being faithful to the message than being careful to not offend people.

John MacArthur & Pretrib Rapture

Who knows, maybe John (Reformedispy) MacArthur is right and the greatest Greek scholars (Google "Famous Rapture Watchers"), who uniformly said that Rev. 3:10 means PRESERVATION THROUGH, were wrong. But John has a conflict. On the one hand, since he knows that all Christian theology and organized churches before 1830 believed the church would be on earth during the tribulation, he would like to be seen as one who stands with the great Reformers. On the other hand, if John has a warehouse of unsold pretrib rapture material, and if he wants to have "security" for his retirement years and hopes that the big California quake won't louse up his plans, he has a decided conflict of interest. Maybe the Lord will have to help strip off the layers of his seared conscience which have grown for years in order to please his parents and his supporters - who knows? One thing is for sure: pretrib is truly a house of cards and is so fragile that if a person removes just one card from the TOP of the pile, the whole thing can collapse. Which is why pretrib teachers don't dare to even suggest they could be wrong on even one little subpoint! Don't you feel sorry for the straitjacket they are in? While you're mulling all this over, Google "Pretrib Rapture Dishonesty" for a rare behind-the-scenes look at the same 180-year-old fantasy.

Your article, Language In The Pulpit was excellent! Unfortunately, there are some preachers and speakers who do use inappropriate language in the pulpit. Sometimes that language and references are inappropriate for a congregation where there are children present. Your biblical quotes give clear messages to preachers and speakers. I only wish they would read and abide by them.
One such person that comes to mind is James David Manning, the pastor of ATLAH World Ministries Church in New York City. He has YouTube videos over the Internet. His hateful and racist words used in his sermons and lectures are filled with disgusting allegations about people, especially President Obama and his family. He also uses words and references that we may refer to as ‘gutter’ or street language. He is that kind of person that really needs to read your article and the Biblical quotes that you have included.

The only way I can conclude, re foul mouth both in and out of the pulpit, although those who teach will receive a strickter judgement, is that Paul has been dismissed. These great verses you quoted have no bearing on this hip group.